Ellen Tordesillas Goes Anti

Even good friends occasionally need a whack upside the head.

Ellen Tordesillas is actually not my friend. I don't know her. Never met her. But she is a blogging colleague, sincere in her work, pro-Philippines day and night. Her heart is good. She writes about opera and the passing of good people. I read her blog regularly.

But I fear she has gone anti. Anti Aquino.

What does "anti" mean? It means packing an agenda, with the agenda being the lens through which facts are digested and commentary is spewed.

I've written in the past that it is easy to drift to the negative ("Bemoan or Build"). We all tend to look at the flaws rather than the things that are in order. We are removed from the playing field so have a rather sanitized, unreal view about activity that is dirty, unplanned and bone-crunching.

Her blog is called, simply, "ellen tordesillas". What is disturbing to me is the opening line in her self-description:

• "I'm Ellen Tordesillas, a journalist."

Ellen's second site, "The Vera Files", touts itself as an investigative journalism site where "Truth is Our Business".

Advisory

I do not provide links to Ellen Tordesilla's blog sites because my Google Chrome security service on November 23 advised me that "The Vera Files" issues malware harmful  to computers. I suspect the sites are under attack by hackers, as her comment thread has also been knocked out of order.

Hmmmmm. I thought there was a difference between a journalist and a commentator. Now journalists are entitled to opinions, too. But those opinions ought to be clearly separated from the business of reporting the facts about events.

Here are Ellen's recent headlines and opening lines on articles about President Aquino:

• "PH should face up to the reality 'When China rules the world' "

• "When President Aquino was making waves in the summit of Asean leaders and their dialogue partners in Cambodia with his statement urging the United States to speak up on the South China Sea conflict which was anathema to China . . ." (November 22)

• "Aquino living up to the role of U.S. dummy

• "In a United States-written script, President Aquino performed his role very well as the American dummy in Southeast Asia at the 21st Asean summit in Cambodia." (November 20)

• "Aquino berating media is becoming boring"

• "Why am I not surprised that the Freedom of Information bill in the House of Representatives has been declared dead in the 15th Congress by press freedom advocates? Simple: President Aquino does not support it. (November 15)

• "Concrete evidence, not snide remarks, needed to convict Gloria"

• "The day that President Aquino talks about his accomplishments without snide remarks at Gloria Arroyo, is the day I can say that he has matured as a leader of this country. As of now, his penchant for snide remarks about people he doesn’t like gives the impression of being juvenile."  (November 7)

• "Edith Burgos on Aquino’s ‘leftist propaganda’ remark"

• "Still searching for her missing son, Edith Burgos, wife of press freedom icon Jose Burgos Jr. and mother of Jonas Burgos, who was never seen since he was abducted by persons suspected to be members of the military on April 28, 2007, issued a statement yesterday in reaction to President Aquino’s remark dismissing criticisms about the dismal human rights records of his administration as leftist propaganda." (October 25)

• "Making sure we got the President correctly on internet libel"

• "This is what President Aquino said at the forum of the Foreign Correspondents Association in the Philippines Wednesday on internet libel in the Cybercrime Law which he signed last Sept. 1." (October 18)

• "PNoy, Padaca don’t get it"

• "What is it in being in position of power that dulls the mind and blurs the comprehension of people we thought were sensible?" (October 7)

• "If PNoy believes Puno’s Israel trip story, pity the Filipino people"

• "I wish President Aquino would stop talking about “tuwid na daan” anymore. It’s adding insult to injury with the way he protected Rico Puno, his shooting buddy whom he appointed undersecretary in the Department of Interior and Local Government. He accepted Puno’s resignation last Sept. 11." (September 16)

• "President Aquino accepts Puno’s resignation"

• "Last Friday, former DILG Undersecretary Rico E. Puno submitted his letter of resignation to the President, through Executive Secretary Paquito Ochoa Jr. The President has accepted Mr. Puno’s resignation effective immediately." (September 11)

• "PNoy’s buddies: ‘they are different from you and me’"

• "Pnoy inducts his shooting buddy. After days of deafening silence on the issue of his favorite undersecretary,Rico Puno,in-charge of police matters at the Department of Interior and Local Government,attempting to get hold of the documents in the possession of the late Interior Secretary Jesse Robredo, President Aquino finally spoke and revealed that it was upon his orders that Puno did it." (September 9)

Now I have absolutely no problem with opinions being registered on a blog site. But I have trouble with opinions being registered as "journalism" and I have trouble with agenda being labeled objective.

If I follow the articles, I am to believe that President Aquino did absolutely nothing constructive for the Philippines during the three month period from which these headlines were drawn. Instead, I am to believe that he is characterized by:

• " Deafening silence" (about a delicate issue).

• "Adding insult to injury" (because he did not agree with critics of Puno or their recitation of events).

• "Being dull of mind with blurred comprehension" (because he advocated Padaca, a feminine Robredo, for a COMELEC position).

• "Having a dismal human rights record" (because he disagrees with those who think he is doing nothing about extra-judicial murders).

• "Being snide and juvenile" (because he did a funny wheelchair joke at Gloria Arroyo's expense).

• "Being a dummy" (for advocating international engagement in the West China Sea rather than China's bilateral engagement strategy).

• "Making waves" (for advocating US engagement "in anathema" to China)

I'd swear I'm on Get Real Post, that manipulative, agenda freak of a blog site that bans readers who have opposing views. The notorious thug-site that encourages personal insults against commenters who disagree.

And I actually agree, as a highly opinionated blogger myself, with some of the opinions Ellen Tordesillas registers. But where are the accolades when the President gets it right? Where is the balanced weighing of two sides of a controversial issue before rendering judgment?

These articles are hack jobs.

I can't imagine a patriotic Filipino not being proud of President Aquino's work at the ASEAN summit. First of all, he was sick as a dog, but pulled himself out of bed to get to this important confab. Second of all, he did not roll over to Cambodia's "consensus" statement, which was nothing more than a sly political move to try to push the Philippines and Viet Nam aside. Only President Aquino had the forthright courage to stand firm and state the Philippines did not agree to the Cambodian "consensus" statement.

For this, he is called a "dummy"?

You want him to roll over and accede to China, say so. Articulate why.

I no longer trust the objectivity of this "journalist" right now. Ten articles. Two neutral. Eight critical. Zero complimentary. Lots of unkind, loaded words.

The trend of criticism of the President is so pronounced, that I have determined the correct placement of the blog on The Philippine Blog Center  is with other "anti" blogs like Get Real Post. It is not necessarily a permanent assignment, as I review these blogs regularly to see if they have gone mainstream. But that seems to be the proper assignment.

I am also moving the blog "The Nutbox" to the mainstream "Top Blog" column. This blog does not have frequent commentary, but what is there is superior in form and content, and it is intellectually honorable. The writing is from the perspective of a younger Filipino and points in a direction that Philippine blogging would be well served aspiring to: intelligent, objective and devoid of emotional "win/lose" esteem battles.

JoeAm's "Top 5 Most Influential Bloggers in the Philippines"

I have spent several days reviewing every blog site I can get my link-clicker on. It is amazing how many blogs are out there dealing with the Philippine condition. All  you do is take one blog roll and it leads to another and another and soon you have about 100 sites on hand. Half of them are expired, some are lazy and slow, and others are active.  Lawyers, educators, politicians, satirists, priests, journalists, retired Americans, screenwriters . . . a wide range.

I'm sorry I can't do justice to the quality writing that is out there. There are some great commentaries, generally lost in the internet woods, I fear. There are just too many sites to keep up with.

A lot of the sites are what I would call vanity blogs. Infrequent articles, not a lot of audience or commentary. Just the writer taking the opportunity to spout off about something. Often eloquently.

Well, to pick the top bloggers, it is important to have some criteria, some guidelines, some standards. What makes one blog site "better" than another?  It is not the political or social agenda some take up (anti-Aquino or pro-RH, for instance). There's nothing wrong with having an ideology and passion.  It has something to do with being pertinent to the Philippine condition, being well-written and thought provoking, and, indeed, being popular. The more people it reaches, if quality and pertinence are identical, the better it is.

Of course, if it is trash, more chat-room than intellectual, it is not "better" than a less popular but more substantial set of articles and comments.

Get Real Contributor

I think reader comments say a lot, actually, about the quality of a blog. That's why, by definition, I only have considered the "engaging" blogs, those which welcome dialogue and foster discussion. One-way reports may be news or commentary, but it is not the kind of rich blogging I'm trying to recognize.

It is easy to find sites that address the Philippine condition. It is sometimes difficult to say which is more important. Popularity or quality. Take the case of MLQIII who rarely blogs, but offers extraordinarily well-researched and thoughtful pieces. Where do you put him?

I have concocted a scale to sort this out It is called the "JoeAm Influence-o-meter". MLQIII ranks low because he simply is not out there enough.

And what about Rappler? Is that a blog site? Or sites that repost what others have written?  Friend manuelbuencamino's articles appear on perhaps five or more different blogs. Well, I put Rappler in the category of a "news and commentary" site, not a blog site. It is not built on dialogue. And sites that collect and reblog posts from elsewhere do not offer the original thought that makes up what I call a "well-written" article.

Rappler is on my daily reads, but it is not a blog site where dialogue is prominent.

What about sites like Get Real Post that have intelligent commentary but also a lot of chat-room interplay and insults, and which even encourage personal attacks if it advances the agenda? Is there a penalty for that?

You damn betcha.

If you are building, you are building. If you are tearing down, you are not building. Indeed, insult is aimed at driving away commentary, so it would be the opposite of "engaging". Furthermore, a part of JoeAm's influence evaluation has to do with the fundamental goal of building a BETTER Philippine condition. Not replicating the venom and vendetta that makes a WORSE Philippine condition.

Here are JoeAm's "Top 5 Engaging Filipino Bloggers":

Raissa Robles

1. Raissa Robles offers by far the most active blogging site in the Philippines. Inputs range in the thousands for some article. Some of the comments are "toss-offs" but many offer important perspectives that build on the original article. There are so many comments that she has to employ a decimal system of indexing them. The articles are topical, varied and well written. Many have just the right kind of "edge" to provoke healthy discussion. Without a doubt, Raissa is the number one blogger in the Philippines.

2. Noemi Dado is the principal behind three blogging sites: (a) blogwatch.ph, (b) blogwatch.tv and (c ) momblogger.  The .ph site offers high quality articles, well-written and pertinent to the Philippine condition; comment is rare. The .tv site offers timely social/political news, advocacies and commentary; it ran a daily account of the Corona trial, for instance; comments are light. The momblogger site deals with family issues and health, a "wholesome" perspective; it has a little more commentary. I have no idea why Noemi runs three separate efforts rather than one integrated effort. The main drawback to the persistent run of articles is the lack of vibrant discussion. The advantage is the volume of very timely and topical articles, well written, including advocacy pieces that are most enlightening. Dividing the effort over three sites seems . . . oh, unfocused. [N: Sorry for the original misspelling; I call my daughters by the wrong names, too. Joe)

3. Ellen Tordisillas is a journalist with a viewpoint and she offers them on two sites: ellentordesillas, which is commentary on the Philippine condition from several contributors, and The Vera Files, which is more or less an investigative journalism site ("Truth Is Our Business"). The articles are timely, topical and well written. Commentary is sometimes rich, often thin. She gets articles from numerous contributors. Again, having two different blogs seems to dilute the impact, and duplicate some content.

4. Benigno operates Get Real Post with a stable of good writers who follow his anti-Aquino agenda and pull in fairly active discussion. Ilda, especially attracts a good amount of commentary. The site includes active business, entertainment and technology sections, as well as articles about the Philippine condition. GRP gets dinged for tolerating abuse in favor of its agenda, the outcome of which is active commentary from "friends" and little of the constructive oppositional discussion that leads to fresh thinking. It may be my bias speaking, but the site seems to be getting smaller and tinnier, not deeper and richer.

The Real Joe Am?

5. The rest of us. I don't see anyone else close, but maybe I missed something fro the trampling of the blogging herds. BongV at AntiPinoy is off in his strident statistical land.  Cocoy can't quite seem to get ProPinoy untracked, perhaps because it is not a primary effort for him. Joe Am is unique in style and American perspective, and is on the rise, but doesn't yet have broad reach. There are some excellent topical sites out there: for economics, for updates on the Judiciary, for satire, for perspectives from priests. They aren't active enough to sustain much power on their own.

I'm amused by the vision of blogging as being similar to the Philippines itself. Very tribal (fractionalized) and ego-bound. Missing is the unity, the community, that makes it a powerful force. The defunct Filipino Voices came closest to representing an integrated community of bloggers without political agenda, where wide-ranging comments were offered. It died from lack of editorial attention and jealous in-fighting amongst the participating readers and writers.

Perhaps we'll see some enterprising soul take several the existing blogs and put them together in a new influential force that might give Raissa come competition.

Or I'll just have to persuade Boo to write some more fine critiques and leverage JoeAm to a broader audience.

Sedition: A Variable Crime Arising from Insecurity

I was prowling the online law library of Chan Robles researching Customs law. According to standing Customs law, which are ancient statutes put into effect by Presidential Decree under President Marcos, inspectors are supposed to be on the lookout for seditious materials. As decreed, the following are banned:

(b) Written or printed articles in any form containing any matter advocating or inciting treason, or rebellion, or insurrection, sedition or subversion against the Government of the Philippines, or forcible resistance to any law of the Philippines, or containing any threat to take the life of, or inflict bodily harm upon any person in the Philippines.

That is an excerpt from Chan Robles' highly excellent internet law library. Search of the library turned up a series of laws on subversion. They were introduced to stop the spread of communism. All were overturned in 1992 by Republic Act No 7276.

I enjoyed reading the original law, Republic Act No. 1700, approved in 1957. Well, maybe "enjoyed" is not the right word. I was intrigued? Scared? Given the heebie jeebies? The Act was amended and broadened by Presidential Decree  885 under President Marcos in 1976. This is the pertinent section under Decree 885:

Sec. 2. Subversive Associations and Organizations. — Any association, organization, political party, or group of persons organized for the purpose of overthrowing the Government of the Republic of the Philippines with the open or covert assistance and support of a foreign power by force, violence, deceit or other illegal means shall be considered and is hereby declared an illegal organization.

The following acts shall constitute prima facie evidence of membership in any subversive association:

(1) Allowing himself to be listed as a member in any book or any of the lists, records, correspondence, or any other document of the organization;

(2) Subjecting himself to the discipline of such association or organization in any form whatsoever;

(3) Giving financial contribution to such association or organization in dues, assessments, loans, or in any other forms;

(4) Executive order, plans or directives of any kind of such association or organization;

(5) Acting as an agent, courier, messenger, correspondent, organizer, or in any other capacity, on behalf of such association or organization;

(6) Conferring with officers or other members of such association or organization in furtherance of any plan or enterprise thereof;

(7) Transmitting orders, directives, or plans of such association or organization orally or in writing or any other means of communication such as by signal, semaphore, sign or code;

(8) Preparing documents, pamphlets, leaflets, books, or any other type of publication to promote the objectives and purposes of such association or organization;

(9) Mailing, shipping, circulating, distributing, or delivering to other persons any material or propaganda of any kind on behalf of such association or organization;

(10) Advising, counselling, or in other way giving instruction, information, suggestions, or recommendations to officers or members or to any other person to further the objectives of such association or organization;

(11) Participating in any way in the activities, planning action, objectives, or purposes of such association or organization. 

I'm glad that law was prima facie repealed. It is a prima facie catch-bucket that is simply too big and too open to prima facie subjective interpretation.

The important thing to note is that sedition laws come and go. Values change with time and circumstance.

During WW II, after the Japanese attack on Pearl Harbor, American racial angers and mistrust ran amok and the U.S. put Japanese American citizens into camps as threats to the nation. Japanese were declared seditious for having the wrong face. Innocence had nothing to do with it.

In fact, let's go way back in time to 1901, just after the Philippine American War, when the U.S. was trying to establish firm control over the Philippines. I don't know if you caught the link to the photograph that ran under a recent blog here. The blog was entitled  "Ellentordesillas: treasonous or hysterical?

The photograph was pulled from a project done in 2009 by students at the University of California, Irvine, as posted on temblr: The link is:  http://philippines1900.tumblr.com/post/263328179/drama-and-sedition. I trust the students got a top grade for this fine project work.

Here's a large version of the photo. The scene is acerbically amusing, as political cartoons are inclined to be, mocking the bully America:

The 1901 Sedition Act No. 292, Section 10, which the cartoonist condemns, said the following:

• “Until it has been officially proclaimed that a state of war or insurrection against the authority or sovereignty of the United States no longer exists in the Philippine Islands it shall be unlawful for any person to advocate orally, or by writing or printing or like methods, the independence of the Philippine Islands or their separation from the United States, whether by peaceable or forcible means, or to print, publish, or circulate any handbill, newspaper, or other publication advocating such independence or separation.”

The Act resulted in the jailing of many Filipino playwrights, actors and journalists. Sedition laws are the opposite of free speech laws. Hysteria, eh?

Echoes and mirrors . . . echoes and mirrors . . .

Here again are the recent troublesome words of blogger Ellen Tordesillas that suggest some Filipinos want to turn the tables and declare associations with the United States as seditious, undermining Philippine sovereignty:

• The dispute with China over Scarborough Shoal and the Spratlys islands is not only a territorial issue but also of sovereignty. Aquino’s solution of asking the United States to do the monitoring through their spy planes over those disputed islands is tantamount to ceding sovereignty over to the United States. That’s treason.

According to her, relying on the superior technology resources of the United States is treasonous. Next she will want to jail playwrights, actors  and journalists who advocate for closer ties to the United States.

Is that wild, or what?

Sedition charges, and treason charges, give me the heebie jeebies. They are like censorship taken one notch too far, generally by the insecure or angry. It is like having the Ampatuans in charge of determining what speech is allowed.  And according to Ellen, President Aquino is NOT FREE to publicly speculate on what options are available to him in dealing with China, the bullyboy of Asia.

Somehow sedition charges, treason charges, and coups are extreme behaviors all too easily associated with Filipino emotionalism. It is this emotionalism that drives the sensationalist press and the fanatical bias of Filipinos toward Filipino boxers and entertainers (thinking  about the angst in the Philippines over Jessica Sanchez finishing second on American Idol; or go back to the near lunatic ravings about Nicole a few years ago). Objectivity and calm are set aside for making an emotional point.

Two Important Take-aways

These are Joe Am's main deductions from his review of Philippine sedition laws. They are not scientific facts. You are free to dismiss them, or reflect on them.

1. Easy accusations of sedition or treason are founded on emotions of fear and anger. Filipinos are an emotional people, and, beyond that, they are COMFORTABLE in that emotionalism. There are no private or public efforts underway to change it or temper it. The risk exists that such emotionalism will work AGAINST the Philippines by making it a place of everlasting rancor,  bickering, unfounded accusations, and hostile acts.

2. Sedition is a variable keyed to time and circumstance. Charges of sedition generally arise during war or threat of rebellion when fears and angers run high and deep. Sedition is not a fixed "truth". Accusations and convictions are based, not on the facts of the acts, but on the BELIEF that the acts are dangerous. Robbery? The gold is gone. Murder? The body is dead. Sedition? "I don't like what you said."  Thus, in court cases on sedition, the person really being tried is not the accused, but the judge and jury.

Ellentordesillas: treasonous or hysterical?

I see that President Aquino is taking some flack for saying he may ask the U.S. for air coverage of the areas of the West Philippine Sea that are in conflict with China.

The uber-nationalists are blaming him for giving up Philippine sovereignty to the U.S. The harshest view, surprisingly enough, comes from the usually calm and rational blogger Ellen Tordesillas:

• Aquino’s solution of asking the United States to do the monitoring through their spy planes over those disputed islands is tantamount to ceding sovereignty over to the United States. That’s treason.

I think this is a tad hysterical. It seems bizarre to me to declare it treasonous to seek ways to protect Philippine territory and interests. If it is treasonous to lean on an ally then I wonder what Great Britain was doing during WW II.

Here's the link to the full article: ellentordesillas re sovereignty

China of course pounced on the President's remark for its daily rant against the Philippines. Listening to the big, fearful, quaking China, you would think that the Philippines has aimed nuclear missiles at Beijing. China displays the diplomatic nuance of a thug with its jock twisted a little too tight.

So both Ellen and China are ragging on the President. Strange bedfellows.

(Quick digression: Inquiring minds want to know if the famous roast duck is now called Beijing roast duck, or what? I have not been in a Chinese Restaurant since I was forced to slurp chicken feet soup and eat goose liver in Hong Kong back in, oh, 1995. We had Peking roast duck then, as I recall.)

Another article parsing Mr. Aquino's choice of words was penned by journalist manuelbuencamino on propinoy.net. He is his normal wry self, querying:

• As for Beijing, I wonder what it will do if the US does conduct surveillance flights over the disputed areas with or without any request or permission from the Philippines. Is it going to shoot down those planes?

The full article is here: manuelbuencamino re China

Well, I've been critical of President Aquino's lose lips on this matter. I think he should let his foreign affairs people speak on this incident and reserve his comments for serious moments, like when the Philippines issues an ultimatum to China to get its warships out of Philippine territory. I offer that little bit of advice to STRENGTHEN the President, not weaken him.

The Worm Has Now Turned, eh?
http://philippines1900.tumblr.com/post/263328179/drama-and-sedition

The policy ought to be to keep military craft out of the contested areas. We don't want Chinese military occupation of what we consider to be our territory and we presume Bullyboy China feels the same way. So keep the stinkin' guns out of the contested zone until the matter is resolved.

I guess that's what I don't understand about the hue and cry against President Aquino from certain hystericals. You would think HE is the enemy, not China.

This seems to me to be reflective of the Filipino penchant for declaring that if someone does it differently than they would do it, that person deserves to be attacked. Brought to the ground, as it were. It's a win/lose world in the merry Philippines. You are for me or against me, and if you are not for me, you deserve to go DOWN.

It also seems like a grand inferiority psychosis to me, that any active engagement with the U.S. is somehow a threat to Philippine autonomy. I guess you don't give the Philippines and Filipinos much credit, eh? You figure the Philippine officials will automatically kiss Uncle Sam's ass rather than work for the good of the Philippines? They will automatically become pawns to American interests?

Such a low opinion you have of Filipino intelligence, strength and ability to act on behalf of the Philippines.

People who don't trust U.S. motives don't trust President Aquino, I guess. They don't trust ANYBODY but themselves.

That's bad thinking, especially for people who ought to be stock full of Pinoy Pride. If we RESPECT that the President has a big challenge on his hands here, we'd recognize he needs our backing for whatever avenues he and his staff pursue. He doesn't need backbiting. He needs benefit of the doubt. And our trust.

Let me make clear to Ellen and her group of like thinkers what she must not have considered. Mr. Aquino is not the enemy here.

China is.

When Chinese warships are parked in Subic Bay, are you going to declare it treasonous to seek American assistance?

It strikes me that the more that Filipino opinion leaders criticize and undermine the President, the bolder China is likely to become.

So, let me ask . . . call it aggressive curiosity, not accusation . . . where REALLY does the greater "treason" rest?

With those seeking ways to defend the Philippines? Or those aiding and abetting China by undermining the Philippine President?